Last week's issue was so late that I didn't have time to touch on a couple of Chicago Tribune columnists who wrote some things earlier this month that annoyed me.

I can think of four things that make me enjoy reading what a columnist has to say:
1. Writing about something I'm interested in.
2. Writing compelling about something I'm not interested in, temporarily piquing my interest.
3. Writing with a distinct style that I enjoy.
4. Writing with a passion or conviction regarding their opinion.
All four criteria pretty much apply to John Kass' columns for me, while I usually read Eric Zorn when #1 & #4 apply.

Zorn's columns are fine, but his Weblog notebook contains a lot more interesting things to me. Most of his notebook items are too short for columns and tend to be stream of consciousness stuff. This entry on Tuesday, November 18th caught my eye:

SYNONYM FOR SLEAZEBALL
Driving the Tri-State Tollway the other day I saw several billboards for "gentleman's clubs," which are, of course, fancy strip joints.
It seems that "gentleman" is now a synonym for the kind of leering loser who hangs out in Stone Park night spots.
This is no great loss to the language, as the world doesn't seem to need the word "gentleman" much anymore. It's become a term used only ironically -- to call out to a group of 7th grade boys, say.
When was the last time you heard someone refer to a man under 50 as "a gentleman" without a huge wink in the voice?

Okay, so I guess Eric Zorn has never been to a strip club--or perhaps he has been to one that left a very bad taste in his mouth (figuratively, of course). I can also understand distaste for euphemisms. George Carlin (or was it Mike Barnicle???) has some thought-provoking material on euphemisms, essentially pointing out that as new words are used to identify sensitive subjects, the meanings of those words becomes less clear and the impact negated. As Carlin says, in World War I, the condition of a soldier whose nerves are shot as a reaction to the extreme battlefield brutality was known as "Shell Shock". By the 1980's, soldiers no longer got shell shock but instead suffered from "Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder". Short, descriptive & to the point "shell shock" was replaced by a clinical, unemotional medical term for no good reason. No one is "Manic Depressive" anymore, they are "Bi-Polar". No one is "Retarded" anymore; they are "Mentally Challenged". "Crippled" became "Handicapped" then "Physically Challenged" or the ridiculous "HandiCAPABLE". Carlin is a student of the language, and is absolutely correct when he says that words hold no shame and are not hurtful themselves. But I digress.

Strip Clubs became Gentleman's Clubs sometime in the late 80's or early 90's. The new euphemism also coincided with the clubs themselves cleaning up their image and remodeling the interiors. Kinda like when "Taverns" turned into "Sports Bars."

My first objection is Zorn's opinion that only leering losers go to strip clubs. I don't think it's fair to generalize any group of people. If it were fair to say that everyone going to strip clubs are leering losers, then maybe it would be fair to say that all Science Fiction fans are "dateless virgins" or all Churchgoers are "mindless Lemmings" or all Catholic Priests are "homosexual pedophiles". Nope, none of that is fair. It's Overgeneralization.

I've been to a strip club three times in my life. The first time was fun; the second less fun and the third was no fun at all. By that time, my intellect dissected the fantasy illusion that strip clubs offered and without the fantasy, there was no enjoyment. However, just because it's not something for me doesn't make it an inferior thing. I don't understand why people like soccer, gambling and smoking cigars but I accept that some people like to do things I find morally offensive. Besides, you can always fine several law enforcement vehicles outside every strip club, and you know the cops can't be there just for the free buffet.

My second objection is Zorn's opinion that the term "gentleman" is used only ironically. As someone still on the dating scene, I frequently use the term and I frequently hear the term used. In this sense, the term is used to describe a guy who has some values that some consider "old fashioned". Specifically, a guy who will: open a door for a woman, bring her flowers, pay for everything on a date and seek out a woman's input on date activities to name a few. I am amazed that for most of the women I date, I am the first man to give them flowers or that I insist on paying for everything when I take them out. On the one hand, it shocks me that guys have abandoned some easy ways to score points on a date but on the other hand it just makes me look that much better. I am a gentleman, and that is something that is become rare in our society-not just ironic.

Now we come to John Kass.

Kass wrote a great column last Sunday about the Chicago Tribune Holiday Campaign and one charity that benefits from donations. Excellent piece, very well written and impactful. His column on Thursday, November 6th was substandard. I hated it.

"Right to life is not about righteousness" was about the euphemistically named "Partial-birth abortion" procedure. The clinical term for this clinical procedure is: "Dilation & Extraction". Dilation & Extraction procedures are called D&X, Intact D&X, and Intrauterine cranial decompression. The non-medical term "Partial-birth Abortion" is used by Abortion foes. For more information on the disinformation, check out this site or this site. One of my opinions on abortion is that a man's opinion doesn't really matter because he has no valid point-of-reference. It's kinda like having the Sun-Times' Neil Steinberg writing a column about the Black community and having Mary Mitchell write about Chicago from the perspective of a stuck-up, nerdy Ohioan. Makes no sense.

Kass' column ends with this:
I support the ban on partial-birth abortion. Thousands of children are delivered alive, their bodies outside the womb as an instrument is inserted into their skulls and they're torn apart.
And though one technique was outlawed, late-term abortions may be achieved with different methods. The child isn't brought outside the womb. What is done is done inside, with forceps.
It is appalling and terrifying. Whether you're religious or not, whether you support abortion rights or oppose them, there is a price to be paid by a culture that condones such things. It coarsens us. It brutalizes us.
We say we care about children, but then we fight about the right to do this to them. I'm sorry, but I can't reconcile it.

Aside from the Anti-Abortion Industry rhetoric (and let's just be clear that even though I am pro-choice/anti-abortion, I am against all skewed viewpoints on the issue. I prefer facts to hysterical rhetoric), there is a subtle message in this column that Kass may or may not have intended. The message is: "This procedure is disgusting, so it is bad". As wonderful as it would be to live our lives without horrible, appalling, disgusting things happening around us, it's just not possible. Life ain't pretty.

Kass is so appalled by the D&X procedure (or, more likely, the embellished accounts of the procedure by those against it) that he supports the ban. You know, many animal rights activists are appalled by the treatment of farm animals and livestock as they are groomed to be our food. Maybe we should consider a ban. In fact, the average person is so far detached from food production in our society that even the slightest detail about what their food went through to get to the dinner table would make them sick. How many vegetarians would be created every year if 60 Minutes did stories from the slaughterhouse killing floor? Many would find the whole sequence of turning a live animal into food appalling. Time for a ban?
Testing cosmetics on animals? Terrifying.
Testing drugs on animals? Disgusting.
Have you ever seen a racehorse up-close? They are skinny with veins popping all over their bodies. They have to be shot up with several drugs so that they don't bleed or experience much pain after being raced by a human with a whip. Horrible.

Kass has assigned his value system on something that is probably never done as a convenience--something that he will never be in a position to experience. Hey, life is hard. People die. Atrocities, man-made and not, happen. AIDS is an appalling and terrifying thing, but it is part of life on the planet earth. It's not a pretty thing, but much of life is not pretty. We just deal with it. Sure, we can erect a nice facade, but the truth lies underneath. No doctor developed the D&X procedure as a way to kill just for the heck of it. Would it be nice if there were no need for abortion? Yes, just like it would be nice if there were no need for guns. Or prisons. Or war.

It's a slippery slope to make laws against something just because you think it's appalling. Where will it stop? One man's appalling procedure is another's "Beer Can Chicken".